SHROUD SCIENCE GROUP
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCEThe Shroud of
Turin:
Perspectives on a Multifaceted Enigma

OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY BLACKWELL HOTEL

August 14 through August 17, 2008
Abstracts of Papers

Analytical
Results On Thread Samples Taken From The Raes Sampling Area (Corner) Of The
Shroud Cloth by Robert Villarreal with Barrie Schwortz and M.
Sue Benford. Saturday, August 16, 10:15 a.m.–10:45 a.m.

I became involved with the analytical aspect of the
Shroud when Ray Rogers asked me for help in conducting certain Shroud image
formation studies. He needed an alpha-particle source to complete
investigation of possible image formation processes and some radiochemical
calculations on the depth of penetration of an emitted alpha-particle into
flax fibers. I provided him with both and he asked further for X-ray
Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS) measurements on a special sample he termed
a “spliced thread” or R1 sample. The XPS measurements were made and he was
quite excited at the results because they indicated the two ends of the
thread were not the same and he additionally asked if there were other
specialized non-destructive equipment that might be available. I compiled
a list of analytical equipment that seemed appropriate that included:

Before I was able to give him the above compilation,
Ray passed away. Ray repeatedly asserted to me that he was not concerned
whether the Shroud was or was not the burial shroud of Jesus, but if a
determination was to be made, it must be scientifically correct.

Based on evidence he had accumulated, Ray was convinced
that the material from the Raes (1973) and C-14 (1988) sampling corner
(lower left corner of frontal image area) was significantly different from
the original Shroud cloth. After his death, I asked Joan, Ray’s wife, what
I should do with the thread sample he had given me for analyses and she said
to hold on to it. About 18 months later, I received a call from Barrie
Schwortz inquiring if I had the “spliced thread.” I asked him if I should
proceed to arrange to conduct analyses on the thread with the above
instruments and he encouraged me to continue. After conducting analysis at
high vacuum with the ToF-SIMS, the “spliced thread” broke into three
distinct pieces; a fuzzy end (Region 1), a tight woven end (Region 2), and a
micro-sized circular cocoon-shaped brown crust that seemed to be connecting
the two end pieces. The ToF-SIMS results were the first to show that the
spectra from the two ends were similar to cotton rather than linen (flax)
and the Spectroscopist recommended that the next analysis should be with the
FTIR instrument. After several scans of individual fibers or strands, the
FTIR data showed that the two ends (Region 1 and 2) were definitely cotton
and not linen (flax). The crust appeared to be an organic-based resin,
perhaps a terpene species, with cotton as a main sub-component. After
showing the FTIR data to Barrie Schwortz and Sue Benford, they were quite
surprised at the results and decided to send me two other pieces of thread
(No. 7 and 14) that were from the same sampling area and that had been in
John Brown’s Lab in Marrietta, Georgia.

The results of the FTIR analysis on all three threads
taken from the Raes sampling area (adjacent to the C-14 sampling corner) led
to identification of the fibers as cotton and definitely not linen (flax).
Note, that all age dating analyses were conducted on samples taken from this
same area. Apparently, the age-dating process failed to recognize one of
the first rules of analytical chemistry that any sample taken for
characterization of an area or population must necessarily be representative
of the whole. The part must be representative of the whole. Our analyses of
the three thread samples taken from the Raes and C-14 sampling corner showed
that this was not the case. What was true for the part was most certainly
not true for the whole. This finding is supported by the spectroscopic data
provided in this presentation.

The recommendations that stem from the above analytical
study is that a new age dating should be conducted but assuring that the
sample analyzed represents the original main shroud image area, i.e. the
fibers must be linen (flax) and not cotton or some other material. It is
only then that the age dating will be scientifically correct.